• <ins id="pjuwb"></ins>
    <blockquote id="pjuwb"><pre id="pjuwb"></pre></blockquote>
    <noscript id="pjuwb"></noscript>
          <sup id="pjuwb"><pre id="pjuwb"></pre></sup>
            <dd id="pjuwb"></dd>
            <abbr id="pjuwb"></abbr>

            C++&&Linux

            做自己喜歡的事情

              C++博客 :: 首頁(yè) :: 聯(lián)系 :: 聚合  :: 管理
              3 Posts :: 4 Stories :: 1 Comments :: 0 Trackbacks

            常用鏈接

            留言簿(18)

            我參與的團(tuán)隊(duì)

            搜索

            •  

            最新評(píng)論

            閱讀排行榜

            評(píng)論排行榜

            2014年8月21日 #

            @import url(http://m.shnenglu.com/CuteSoft_Client/CuteEditor/Load.ashx?type=style&file=SyntaxHighlighter.css);@import url(/css/cuteeditor.css); 出售如下二手書(shū):@import url(http://m.shnenglu.com/CuteSoft_Client/CuteEditor/Load.ashx?type=style&file=SyntaxHighlighter.css);@import url(/css/cuteeditor.css);
            《一個(gè)操作系統(tǒng)的實(shí)現(xiàn)》
            《Photoshop設(shè)計(jì)寶典》
            《OpenGL編程指南》
            《More Effective C++》
            《Linux系統(tǒng)管理手冊(cè)》
            《Imperfect C++》
            《GRE詞匯精選》
            《DSP嵌入式系統(tǒng)開(kāi)發(fā)典型案例》
            《深度探索C++對(duì)象模型》
            《Advanced C++》


            封面截圖見(jiàn):http://pan.baidu.com/s/1mgDliDq
            聯(lián)系QQ:121475490
            posted @ 2014-08-21 07:50 Smile 閱讀(308) | 評(píng)論 (0)編輯 收藏

            2011年8月11日 #

            原文地址:

            http://tom.preston-werner.com/2010/08/23/readme-driven-development.html


            Readme Driven Development

            23 August 2010 - San Francisco

            I hear a lot of talk these days about TDD and BDD and Extreme Programming and SCRUM and stand up meetings and all kinds of methodologies and techniques for developing better software, but it's all irrelevant unless the software we're building meets the needs of those that are using it. Let me put that another way. A perfect implementation of the wrong specification is worthless. By the same principle a beautifully crafted library with no documentation is also damn near worthless. If your software solves the wrong problem or nobody can figure out how to use it, there's something very bad going on.

            Fine. So how do we solve this problem? It's easier than you think, and it's important enough to warrant its very own paragraph.

            Write your Readme first.

            First. As in, before you write any code or tests or behaviors or stories or ANYTHING. I know, I know, we're programmers, dammit, not tech writers! But that's where you're wrong. Writing a Readme is absolutely essential to writing good software. Until you've written about your software, you have no idea what you'll be coding. Between The Great Backlash Against Waterfall Design and The Supreme Acceptance of Agile Development, something was lost. Don't get me wrong, waterfall design takes things way too far. Huge systems specified in minute detail end up being the WRONG systems specified in minute detail. We were right to strike it down. But what took its place is too far in the other direction. Now we have projects with short, badly written, or entirely missing documentation. Some projects don't even have a Readme!

            This is not acceptable. There must be some middle ground between reams of technical specifications and no specifications at all. And in fact there is. That middle ground is the humble Readme.

            It's important to distinguish Readme Driven Development from Documentation Driven Development. RDD could be considered a subset or limited version of DDD. By restricting your design documentation to a single file that is intended to be read as an introduction to your software, RDD keeps you safe from DDD-turned-waterfall syndrome by punishing you for lengthy or overprecise specification. At the same time, it rewards you for keeping libraries small and modularized. These simple reinforcements go a long way towards driving your project in the right direction without a lot of process to ensure you do the right thing.

            By writing your Readme first you give yourself some pretty significant advantages:

            • Most importantly, you're giving yourself a chance to think through the project without the overhead of having to change code every time you change your mind about how something should be organized or what should be included in the Public API. Remember that feeling when you first started writing automated code tests and realized that you caught all kinds of errors that would have otherwise snuck into your codebase? That's the exact same feeling you'll have if you write the Readme for your project before you write the actual code.

            • As a byproduct of writing a Readme in order to know what you need to implement, you'll have a very nice piece of documentation sitting in front of you. You'll also find that it's much easier to write this document at the beginning of the project when your excitement and motivation are at their highest. Retroactively writing a Readme is an absolute drag, and you're sure to miss all kinds of important details when you do so.

            • If you're working with a team of developers you get even more mileage out of your Readme. If everyone else on the team has access to this information before you've completed the project, then they can confidently start work on other projects that will interface with your code. Without any sort of defined interface, you have to code in serial or face reimplementing large portions of code.

            • It's a lot simpler to have a discussion based on something written down. It's easy to talk endlessly and in circles about a problem if nothing is ever put to text. The simple act of writing down a proposed solution means everyone has a concrete idea that can be argued about and iterated upon.

            Consider the process of writing the Readme for your project as the true act of creation. This is where all your brilliant ideas should be expressed. This document should stand on its own as a testament to your creativity and expressiveness. The Readme should be the single most important document in your codebase; writing it first is the proper thing to do.

            posted @ 2011-08-11 18:20 Smile 閱讀(1491) | 評(píng)論 (0)編輯 收藏

            2007年12月10日 #

            ubuntu 7.10下g++的疑問(wèn)
                裝完ubuntu 7.10后,在它下面寫(xiě)了一個(gè)基本的C++程序,用g++ 4.1編譯后發(fā)現(xiàn)了一個(gè)令我感到迷惑的地方。如下的程序:
               int main(int argc, char* argv[])
                {
                  std::cout << "hello" << std::endl;
                }
            在g++下沒(méi)有報(bào)任何錯(cuò)誤和警告!
            posted @ 2007-12-10 17:30 Smile 閱讀(567) | 評(píng)論 (0)編輯 收藏

            一本色道久久HEZYO无码| 99久久亚洲综合精品成人| 热久久最新网站获取| 久久久黄色大片| 狠狠狠色丁香婷婷综合久久五月| 久久婷婷国产麻豆91天堂| 亚洲精品无码久久毛片| 久久精品国产亚洲av高清漫画| 99re久久精品国产首页2020| 久久九九免费高清视频| 伊人久久久AV老熟妇色| 国产成人精品久久一区二区三区av | 久久精品人妻中文系列| 国产精品18久久久久久vr| 久久综合久久鬼色| 久久精品免费观看| 久久精品国产亚洲AV麻豆网站| 久久亚洲精品国产亚洲老地址| 国产精品一久久香蕉产线看 | 国产精品久久久久久久人人看| 国产精品久久久久影院色| 精品综合久久久久久98| 久久国产视屏| 久久亚洲精品视频| 久久精品天天中文字幕人妻| 亚洲国产成人精品无码久久久久久综合 | 无码人妻久久一区二区三区蜜桃| 精品久久久久久亚洲精品 | 香港aa三级久久三级| 国产精品久久久亚洲| 亚洲AV无码久久精品成人| 午夜精品久久久久久| 亚洲欧洲精品成人久久奇米网| 日本精品久久久中文字幕| 日韩精品久久久久久| 品成人欧美大片久久国产欧美...| 精品久久久久久| 精品一区二区久久久久久久网站| 久久精品国产久精国产思思| 午夜精品久久久久久久久| 无码人妻久久一区二区三区免费丨 |